Innovation through Cross-Fertilization

 

Source: http://joeplanner.blogspot.com/

 

For most of American history, the rhythms of everyday life served to facilitate intellectual cross-fertilization. From colonial villages to frontier towns, and from urban tenements to first-ring suburbs, American life was long centered uniquely on what Tocqueville and others termed “townships.” Yes, distinctions like race and ethnicity divided society, but while Europeans defined themselves by social class, Americans were much more focused on the neighbors who lived and worked nearby.

This article beautifully explains the negative impact social engineering, human nature, and the decline of civic institutions has had on innovation.  In the past citizens were deeply involved in civic meetings, church, and community events.  They focused less on finding personal satisfaction through family and friends.  The author cites research that suggests the reverse is now true and it is undermining our collective ability to innovate.  (Nota bene, the image used above is clearly of a European town square.  I could find no equivalent for an American city.)

Using his hometown of Buffalo as an example, he implies that the effort to become a hub for life sciences (e.g., biotechnology and pharmaceuticals) has not yet fulfilled expectations.  The reader is to infer that this could be explained by a lack of professional diversity, as is noted in the quote above.

Very few, if any, of us will ever influence a community the size of Buffalo.  However, we all affect our work community.  When compiling work teams, look for contributors from non-obvious or seemingly unrelated departments.  Create opportunities for employees to interact informally.  The author notes that “many firms allow researchers to spend a portion of their time exploring topics beyond the projects at hand.”  If the past is precedent, innovation will follow.

I’ll close this post with another example from the author.

Detroit, for example, didn’t become the global motor-vehicle mecca by design. Rather, random interactions among engine designers, ship builders, and carriage manufacturers at the turn of the twentieth century created a mashup of ideas on the shores of the Detroit River, and from that intellectual ferment emerged the mass production of automobiles.

 

Small Changes/Big Results

I believe a reason many organizations fail to meet their goals is not because the goals are unrealistic but because they don’t have a clear path to achieve them.  Setting is goals is necessary and valuable.  Goals are motivating and provide a benchmark for performance.  However, setting a goal is only part of the story.  There must be a plan for achieving the goal.

That is why I love David Brailsford’s approach.  He sets goals and has a plan for achieving them.  In the video above, Sir David explains his approach.  I have summarized this below.

• The cumulative effect of 1% gains leads to significantly improved performance.  What is the goal?  Not victories but improved performance.  See points 3 & 5.
• Look at every aspect of your operation.  His team looked at obvious things like diet, fitness, and tactics but also considered recovery, technological developments and psychology.
• Enough fractional improvements add up to a larger fraction and lead to a better outcome.
• Analyze every aspect of your operation, set goals and work out a plan to achieve them.
• “Focus on the process not the outcome and you’re going to get the best chance of being the best that you can be.  What can I do today to optimize my chances?”
• Coaching is important.  If you expect the rider to be the best then why don’t you expect the same of the coaches?

Where did this approach take British cycling and Team Sky?

• At the 2004 Olympic Games Great Britain won two cycling gold medals, their best performance since 1908.^[11]
• Under Brailsford’s leadership, the cycling team continued to improve, winning multiple world championships in road, track, BMX and Mountain bike racing.
• Great Britain lead the cycling medal table at the 2008 and 2012 Olympic Games, winning 8 golds at both, while British cyclists won 59 World Championships from 2003-2013.^[12]
• In 2010, Brailsford also became the manager of the new British-based professional team, Team Sky.^[13] As Sky Team principal he oversaw both Bradley Wiggins‘ and Chris Froome‘s victories in the 2012 and 2013 Tour de France.^[14][15]

— Source: Wikipedia

This approach is radically different than most organizations take.  In an era where outcomes dominate our attention, it is hard to adopt a process-oriented approach.  It is a vastly different mindset that many cannot grasp.  It takes courage.  It takes confidence.  It takes humility.

Another thing I like about this approach is that it is scalable.  No matter how large your organization or the size of your team you can apply the principles listed above.  Team Sky has less than 30 riders and 18 support staff.  The key is your mindset.  Do your employees know what to look for?  Do they feel comfortable bringing ideas for marginal gains to you?  Are you willing to meet and discuss opportunities to gain with your employees regularly?

 

Consistency

This post got me thinking about the value of consistency.  The author’s focus is on consistent effort rather than the quality of being consistent, which is my purpose.

Consistency is a close cousin to reliability.  Both of these virtues are treasures in the workplace.  I’m not talking about consistency in external circumstances, such as delayed shipments or defective product.  Those are a fact of life and can’t be controlled easily.  I’m focused on personal consistency.  This involves a pattern of behavior, habits.

• Do you have a routine that addresses the most important items in the day first?
• Do you regularly check in with key partners to learn about their projects that may affect your tasking?
• Do you have a strategy for managing your email inbox?
• Do you check your task list at the start and end of your day?

Let’s look at some examples of consistency.

1. Is there anything more frustrating than leaving a voice mail or sending an email and not getting a response or even an acknowledgement?  Last week I was traveling and my inbox was full of messages that needed responses when I returned.  After I prioritized them I sent a few quick messages to people whose issues could not be addressed immediately.  In the message, I reassured them that I had received the message and was working on their issue.  It took a few minutes to send these out but it was worth it.  The recipient knew that I had received the message, that I understood what they needed and was working on a solution/answer.  If my response was not clear or there was additional information to provide, my message gave the other person an opportunity to provide that information.  If they need an answer sooner they can tell me that too.  My colleagues expect this from me and know I will follow through.
2. Deadlines got their name for a reason.  It is the last possible time for something to be completed.  I strive to have my work done well in advance of any deadline.  Do I always achieve that goal?  Of course not.  But that doesn’t mean I should give up.  My goal is never be the reason a project cannot be completed on time.  I’m far from perfect but this is a goal I have set for myself and my coworkers expect this from me.  The author of the article linked above correctly points out,  “it’s really easy to confuse being consistent with being perfect. And that is a problem because there is no safety margin for errors, mistakes, and emergencies.”  I can say with confidence that my work will be done, and done well, before the deadline actually arrives.    I developed this as a way to protect myself but experience has taught me that something unexpected always comes up when a deadline approaches.

I will end this post with a piece of advice from the article linked above.

How to Be Consistent: Plan For Failure

Consistency is essential for success in any area. There is no way to get around the fact that mastery requires a volume of work.

But if you want to maintain your sanity, reduce stress, and increase your odds of long-term success, then you need to plan for failure as well as focus on consistency. As I mentioned in my Habits Workshop, research from Stanford professor Kelly McGonigal has shown that the number one reason why willpower fades and people fail to remain consistent with their habits and goals is that they don’t have a plan for dealing with failure.

 

A topic near and dear to my heart

Clear and concise writing is hard to find these days.   Collectively we don’t know how to express our thoughts or meaning into the written word any more.

I had the good fortune to work under a passionate editor early in my career.  She provided meticulous feedback on everything I wrote and I am a better writer because of it.

I also benefited from a word count restriction that forced me to be very judicious with the words I used.  Think Twitter without emoticons or abbreviations.

When I came across this article recently I knew I had to share it immediately.  “Strong writing is lean writing.”  The author recommends cutting 10 words from your writing.  Below is one example.

1. Just: The word “just” is a filler word that weakens your writing. Removing it rarely affects meaning, but rather, the deletion tightens a sentence.

Cutting these words will change the way you express yourself in writing.  Give it a try and see what happens.

 

 

 

Life is easier when people like you (its not that hard)

Here is a nice article on being likable.  This is such an underappreciated characteristic.  The author makes the point, “If you’re disliked, it may not matter how competent you are, people simply won’t want to work with you.”

Likability reminds me of Guy Kawasaki’s recent book on Enchantment.  In it he provides his own advice on likability.

Kawasaki’s are more practical but both authors provide good food for thought.

 

Side Projects

Is this what your to-do list looks like?  Mine does.  My responsibilities are largely in support of other teams or persons.  As a result my to-do list is determined by the priorities of others.  I doubt this is unique to me.  The “stuff” I want to do is much lower on the priority list.

When I start my day I prioritize one thing that I really want to get done.  I don’t mean getting a latte or talking with colleagues about fantasy baseball.  I’m talking about a side project or project that means a lot to me.  Often it is a project that I have neglected and need to focus on and get it off my list.  I make it a priority to get something done on that project.

On days where most of my time is devoted to serving others’ needs and priorities this is a nice way to break up my day.  I also use this time to address issues that are not getting attention.  Since they don’t have deadlines there are no expectations, timelines, or deliverables.  I can allocate 30 minutes out of my day on such a project without disrupting or delaying my other responsibilities.  This is where innovation comes from.  I’m not saying any of my priorities represent innovation, but the freedom to work at my own pace enables me to be more objective.

Spending time of a side project also helps my morale.  I’m a self-starter who enjoys identifying and resolving problems.  Finding and resolving an issue makes my day more satisfying and improves my performance on the to-do items that are in service to others.

 

Allen Toussaint, Genius

Allen Toussaint is an American treasure.  You may not have known he wrote the song in the video above. You probably recognize this version though.

He also wrote Working in a Coalmine, Fortune Teller, Whipped Cream, and Java.  His songs have been performed by a wide range of artists including Patti LaBelle, The Rolling Stones, Ringo Starr, Robert Plant and Allison Krauss, Bo Diddley, The Who, and The Pointer Sisters.

You may be asking yourself, “What does this have to do with learning and performance?”  It all comes down to a comment he made in an interview I listened to recently.  He attributes his success to the variety of music he listened to and tried to “mimic.”  He thought that the piano players all knew something he didn’t so he felt like he needed to learn what they “knew” regardless of the genre.  It was this “innocent, naive attitude” that caused him ” to have a very large scope and with equal respect.”

Consequently he “naturally evolved from being a session piano player to a composer, songwriter, and producer.”  This commitment to learning gave us songs like this.

Thank you Mr. Toussaint.

 

Your Company’s Most Important Asset

Josh Bersin makes a surprisingly bold statement in this article.

Not only should your organization understand the basics of training and development, but you must integrate it with the company’s talent practices (career progression and leadership) and also create a “culture of learning.” As Peter Senge and many others have uncovered, learning culture is perhaps the most important asset a company can build. (emphasis mine)

Think of all the other assets that could have been listed.  Patents, authors or musicians, physical holdings, even its brand.  But a learning culture was ranked higher than all of these.  Why?  There is a direct link between learning and innovation.  Patents are a result of innovation.  A brand is developed and established through innovation.  Knowing what talent or physical asset to pursue is influenced by innovation.  The one thing listed above that cannot be acquired is innovation.  It must be developed and a structured learning program that provides formal learning opportunities and supports informal collaboration is a necessity to support innovation.

Think about the history of companies like Nokia who lost their market to new competitors like Apple, or the many search companies who lost the search market to Google. These companies don’t fail to innovate. They simply fail to learn.

Bersin’s company created a hierarchy for corporate learning.  The model provides a model for companies looking to improve their corporate learning program.  Of course, Bersin would love to send in a team to help you, for a fee.

http://blogs-images.forbes.com/joshbersin/files/2013/03/hilomm.jpg

I want to highlight a few more points from his article.

[W]hen there is no formal training at all, managers and staff tend to coach each other to try to do their jobs more effectively. This form of organizational learning can be effective, but it doesn’t scale well and is dependent on the skills of the senior people.

This is the case even when there is a training program in place.  Nevertheless, this approach is dependent on the skills of supervisors and other management staff.  Even the most conscientious supervisor struggles to balance employee development with his or her regular responsibilities.

Today companies tend to have a lot of level 1 training taking place, even if they have a well run corporate university (Level 2). There is never enough money or resources to take on every training problem, so incidental, manager-led training is going on all the time.

Not only is there never enough money, but there is also a limit to what can be accomplished through formal “training.”  It has to be supported by upline management and tied to organizational goals.

 

At Level 4, which few organizations have achieved today, companies bring together these formal and informal tools with a laser focus on direct job capabilities. Here the organization should turn itself inside out: rather than thinking about skills and job needs, they look at “audiences” and “audience profiles.”

What, for example, does it take to turn a good sales person into a leading sales person?  What does it take to develop a good engineer into a great engineer? The answer is not some form of “training” – it is a combination of training, coaching, performance support, and employee assessment. And the answer is likely unique to your organization.

The focus of this level of talent development is capability development.  An example Bersin provides for this level is ” is the US Military. As one General put it to me, ‘We have only two missions:  to train and to fight. When we aren’t fighting, we are training. And when we are fighting, we are learning.'”

This is the mindset required to be successful.  It takes the highest level of organizational leadership to make it happen.  Everyone in the organization has to value learning and look beyond their job duties.

I believe most organizations have a vast amount of capacity and capability that is untapped.  Putting the proper learning program in place and supporting it with the right mindset is a key to the getting the most of an organization’s talent.

 

How to avoid morale killers, pt. 7

This is the final entry on morale killing behaviors and how to avoid them.  Click here for part 1 of this series. Part 2 Part 3 Part 4 Part 5 Part 6

7. “Employees need to know what is expected of them and need to be given the training, tools and resources to accomplish their goals.”

I work in a Training department so naturally I would gravitate toward the training aspect of this quote.  I have to point out that training is not the answer.  We crank out a lot of training.  If that is all that was required we should be successful, right?  But we’re not.  Why is that?  Is it quality?  In some cases, yes.  Is it because the training is not linked to a clear organizational goal?  Sometimes. Definitely.  There is another problem that often goes overlooked.  The mindset of the organization.

Why was it decided that there would be a Training Department?  Training has such a passive quality about  it.  It implies that all one has to do is attend the seminar or read the handout and you will know what you need to know and be able to do what is required to do your job.

I prefer “learning” over “training.”  There is shared responsibility with learning.  The instructor is responsible for providing learning with clearly stated goals, objectives that will achieve the goal, and learning activities that ensure the focus is correct, the objectives have been met, and remediation is provided as necessary.  A learner is expected to be an active co-participant in this process.  The learner is responsible for being fully engaged in the learning and making sure they acquire the knowledge and skills being taught.  The instructor holds each learner accountable and models engagement.  When this is done right it creates a dynamic environment where all participants, instructor and learners, are equally engaged.

If a learner walks out of a class and cannot clearly articulate what they learned and the ability to apply that knowledge or skill then it was a waste of time.  They also need to know how the learning links to their responsibilities and what they are expected to do with their new learning.  If this isn’t true, somebody failed and it wasn’t the learner.  The materials may not have been adequate or appropriate for the content.  Maybe the instructor wasn’t right for the subject matter.  The learner may have needed a higher level course or more challenge.

The bottom line is that effective learning requires planning.  Its an active process.  This kind of learning is a morale booster not a killer.  It shows a commitment to provide support and a desire to equip employees for success.  Subjecting employees to bland training with no link to their job duties or concern for their unique needs or preferences does the opposite.

 

 

How to avoid morale killers, pt. 6

When employees are engaged they are emotionally attached to the vision of the organization. They believe in what they do, the organization’s vision and the direction the organization is going. Employees who are engaged put their heart and soul into their job and have the energy and excitement to give more than is required of the job. Engaged employees are committed and loyal to the organization.

This the penultimate entry in my series on morale killers.  Click here to read the post that introduced this series.  Scroll down to see what’s new today.

1. “Organizational leadership is responsible for communicating the vision and keeping it in front of the employees.”
   My organization adopted a new vision last year.  It was announced with great fanfare at our annual sales meeting but since then it has drifted into the background.  Promoting and reinforcing an organization’s vision and mission does not have to induce groans or seem patronizing.  If the vision truly reflects the priorities and culture of the organization then it should be an easy “sell” and encourage employees.  The key is doing it the right way and for the right reasons.  Subtle but sustained focus can make a big impact.  Supplementing informal messages with intentional efforts to incorporate the vision into everyday activities will further infuse the organization with the message.
2. “Good communication within the organization can be one of the most important things an organization can do to foster employee engagement.”
   I have a saying, “you can’t over-communicate what’s important.”  That sounds like an over-simplified cliche.  Yet every organization I have worked for or project I have worked on has missed this point.  When times are tough rank-and-file employees need to hear from their leaders…frequently.  And I am not talking about employee meetings, which have a place, but informally.Leaders need to be visible and available.  Taking an hour once a week to walk through cubicle land means a lot to the rank and file.  Simply showing genuine interest in the people who are in the trenches is meaningful and translates to commitment and trust.  Tough times means everyone has to put in extra time and work under tight timelines.  Employees who feel a connection to their leaders will be more engaged.  Work assignments that come from distant unseen leaders have the opposite effect.
3. “Strong employee engagement is dependent on how well employees get along, interact with each other and participate in a team environment”
   I’m not saying everyone has to be friends but the nature of the interaction has to be genuine and authentic.  Some of this goes back to the frequency of the communication but it also has to do with the nature of the communication.  Focusing exclusively on action items and deadlines and never considering the other things that are going on in people’s lives is a morale killer.
4. “Employees are constantly watching leadership to see how their decisions affect the strategic direction of the organization and if their behaviors reflect what they say”
   I am sure everyone reading this blog has seen a leader who does not practice what they preach.  Its hard to stay positive when the news always seems to be bad.  It takes discipline to maintain your composure in trying times.  Everyone has to work hard to remain professional when times are hard.  I am not saying a person has to ignore the obvious.  Quite the contrary.  I believe a person can keep their cool better if they acknowledge that times are tough and routinely take stock of how they are handling the stress of the situation.
   I have seen leaders press on with their agenda despite having no indication that things are improving.  This can reflect confidence but can also make them seem aloof and possibly in denial.  Leaders need to be aware of how they are perceived.  They need good and trusted partners who provide this information.  What’s more they need to act on the information, which illustrates the second point, and communicate with their employees.  Leaders need to be visible and available. Their presence has a calming effect and builds morale.
5. “Employees need to feel validated and that they are a valued part of the organization.”
   This does not mean elaborate signs of recognition.  Make it personal.  Don’t rush it.  As a department head, make a mental note when you learn something significant about a direct report.  If that doesn’t come easily start by writing down something significant about each person on your team.  Take time to acknowledge it with the person.  They’ll be shocked (in a good way) when you ask about it.  Be respectful of their preferences.  Some people don’t want to be recognized in front of their peers (that’s me) while others are comfortable with that type of recognition.
6. “Employees need to feel like they are part of the process, that their thoughts and ideas matter and that they have a voice in how their work is performed”Morale suffers if a person always feels like something is being done to them rather than with them.  All organizations need a hierarchy and they cannot be run democratically.  However, there is also a point everyone can make a contribution that will improve the final product and that point varies depending on the project or skill-set of the individual.  Nevertheless, everyone loses together when an organization fails to meet goals and/or expectations.  Since this is the case shouldn’t everyone get an opportunity to apply their unique talents to prevent this from happening or, even better, contribute to its success?

   By contributing I mean more than simply delegating tasks.  I’m referring to a mindset.  You can tell leaders who are truly open to ideas.  They are energized by new ideas instead of threatened by them.  They seek input rather than simply providing it.  They find resources to support worthy ideas instead of hoarding them.  They recognize and compliment team members who make meaningful contributions.  They motivate through positive messages rather than fear.  People want to be around them.